Local Plan - Hersden

View fullsize

Click it to big it.​

Local Plan - Canterbury south

View fullsize

Click it to big it.​

View fullsize

Click it to big it.​

Local Plan: the role of Howe Barracks

Plans to build housing on Howe Barracks when it closes are "very limited" according to the city council leader.

Cllr John Gilbey said the authority "would be lucky to get 600 houses" out of the site – despite initial hopes the land could solve some of the city's road and housing problems. Mr Gilbey was speaking at the Abode hotel on Friday when traffic expert Dr Lynn Sloman presented her blueprint for sustainable transport in Canterbury.

Responding to comments by Dr Sloman about the potential for the barracks to become "an extension of Canterbury" after it closes, Mr Gilbey said:

"Any development would be very limited. Canterbury golf course takes up a huge swathe of land on its eastern end. Then there's a huge site of special scientific interest. If we get 600 houses we would be lucky, which is a great shame."

He also said the army planned to retain some of the houses on the site, along with land for shooting and training. But the Ministry of Defence said that while it would be keeping a very small number of homes for soldiers in Ashford and Folkestone, it would be selling the rest of the site when the barracks closes next year.

At the event, which attracted councillors, business-people and traffic campaigners, Dr Sloman said the city's medieval road layout was at odds with 21st century levels of traffic. She said promoting cycling, walking and bus use as an alternative to driving could have a big impact on the city's gridlocked streets, and spoke of the importance of the forthcoming Local Plan. She said:

"There's going to be a lot of changes in Canterbury. It's important that it's easier, more attractive and more natural for people to use sustainable transport."

She suggested measures including building developments near shops and services, and locating big employers next to public transport hubs, to reduce  people's dependence on cars.

To read Dr Sloman's report, which was commissioned by the Canterbury Society, visit transportforqualityoflife.com or canterburysociety.org.uk
 
thisiskent 4th May 2013

Hut scramble

If you've ever wanted to have a shack by the sea, now's your chance.​ Our Council have just finished putting up some new sheds, and have opened the bidding.

However, in what is fast becoming their signature style, everything has been left to the last minute, leaving the rest of the world very little time.

The notice went up on the Council website on 15th April 2013, with viewings on 20th April, and a closing date of 3rd May 2013.

These little huts go for thousands of pounds a time - this is not the kind of buying decision that most people would want to rush, and not many people will have a few grand burning a hole in their pockets, just waiting for an impulse purchase to come along.

---

Get your beach hut bids in now

A sealed bidding process for people who want to buy one of 10 new beach huts in Herne Bay and Whitstable has now begun.

The new beach huts – six at Spa Esplanade in Herne Bay and four at Marine Crescent in Whitstable – have just been completed.

Bids must be submitted to the council’s Foreshore Services by Friday 3 May. Successful bidders will be informed shortly afterwards and it is anticipated keys will be handed over in time for the bank holiday weekend at the end of May.

The council will be holding beach hut viewings on Saturday 20 April between 10am and midday in Herne Bay and between 1pm and 3pm in Whitstable. Viewings can be booked by calling Foreshore Services on 01227 266719.

Head of Community Development and Outdoor Leisure, Suzi Wakeham, said:

“We have had lots of interest from prospective buyers over the last few months and they have all now been sent copies of the brochure giving full details of the process involved. It’s a chance to own a brand new beach hut in a sought after location.”

For more information about the huts, call Foreshore Services on 01227 266719 or go to the Foreshore pages on the council's website .

​CCC 15th Apr 2013

Buckets of money to be poured into the Harbour

Our Council put a lot of time and effort into this bid to get a heap of European funding that will boost Whitstable's tourism by enhancing its museum offering and information centre.

Excellent. Well done.

Now it's Herne Bay's turn.​

---

Harbour funding bid gets green light

A city council bid for European funding for Whitstable Harbour has been successful.

The money is coming from the European Union Interreg IVa programme, for the partnerships bid Fostering Long Term Initiatives in Ports. The project sees the council working with a number of other small and medium sized ports including Dieppe, Le Havre, Newhaven and Torbay on initiatives that will improve performance, trade, efficiency and the local economy.

At Whitstable, the funding will go towards studies and models for the redevelopment of redundant buildings, a feasibility study for the development of a maritime heritage and information centre, studies into improved water and energy efficiency and cross border training and capacity building into innovative port financing.

Half of the money for the €600,000 project comes from the European Interreg fund, with the city council providing match funding for the other half.

The council’s Deputy Head of Culture and Enterprise, Dawn Hudd, said:

“Naturally we are very pleased that the bid was successful and are looking forward to working with our partners on both sides of the channel. We can all learn much from each other as we build up close links over the next few years. There is great potential for revamping some areas of the harbour, such as through the redevelopment of the south quay shed. But we want to make it clear that we will be working with local people throughout the process and making sure there is full public consultation on any development plans. We know how passionate the town’s residents are about their harbour.”

CCC 19th Apr 2013

Dog Wardens

Here's a helpful service provided by the Council, Serco, and an outfit called Animal Wardens - between them they will do their best to return stray dogs to their owners. I think it would be a great help if they could also train the owners to "poop scoop".​

---

Big improvements to dog warden service

An enhanced service for lost and found dogs in the district is now up and running.

The city council is working with its contractor Serco and a company called Animal Wardens. People will now be able to report a lost or found dog between 8am and midnight, every day of the year, by calling 01227 290069.

Between 8am and 8pm, a warden will go out and collect a stray dog. Between 8pm and midnight, calls will be answered and arrangements made to collect the dog the next day.

A new website – www.animalwardens.co.uk – is also available for people to report that their pet is missing or to search to see if it has been found.

Animal Wardens staff will make every effort to reunite stray dogs with their owners, but owners are being reminded that it is a legal requirement that their pet has a collar and tag, even if it is also microchipped.

The council’s Head of Neighbourhood Services, Larissa Reed, said:

“A pet dog is an important part of the family and it can be very traumatic if it goes missing. We’re pleased to be improving the lost and found dog service by expanding the hours it operates and making it easier to find out whether a lost pet has been found. Owners can also help us by ensuring their dog has a collar and tag, because that way we can reunite them with their pet quickly and easily.”

CCC 5th Apr 2013

A golden opportunity - blink and you've missed it

In the interests of saving money, CCC is "privatising"​ (i.e. putting out to tender) a number of local events - the Herne Bay Festival, the Herne Bay and Whitstable Classic Car Shows, and now the Canterbury Food and Drink Festival.

This may or may not be a well-conceived idea, but it is certainly being very poorly executed. Despite the fact that (presumably) this stems from a strategic decision taken some ago, CCC has left it till the last moment to advertise each of these opportunities.

On 3rd April 2013, CCC announced on their website that the Food & Drink Festival was up for grabs. The closing date was 19th April 2013.

Do they honestly think they'll get the best tenders by leaving so little time for anyone to prepare a bid? Or did they already have someone lined up, and were only going through the motions of competitive tendering because they're legally obliged to? What do you think?

---

Council seeks food festival delivery partner

The city council is looking for organisations or individuals who think they have what it takes to build on the success of the Canterbury Food and Drink Festival in 2013.

The successful delivery partners will take the established festival brands and develop an exciting programme of events and activities to take them to the next level.

Managing and delivering this popular event that regularly attracts around 20,000 people each year, the successful organisation will actively work with the local business community to shape this popular event, continuing to attract shoppers to Canterbury and supporting the local economy.

The council is keen to make sure that events and activities that are important to the local community, economy and visitors, such as the food festival, are led by those that have the experience, specialisms and networks to ensure their future growth and success.

The council will be looking to contract a new delivery partner in May 2013. Expressions of interest are being sought through the south east business portal at www.businessportal.southeastiep.gov.uk , where the opportunities and individual requirements for the festival are set out. The closing date for expressions of interest is Friday 19 April.

The council’s Head of Culture and Enterprise, Janice McGuinness, said:

“Festivals are an excellent example of how culture, tourism and our local economy can enhance our communities by promoting and celebrating what’s great about where we live. Ensuring our festivals are rooted within our local communities is key to their future development and growth, and the council looks forward to working with the new delivery partners.”

CCC 3rd Apr 2013

Murray might make a mint

Our beloved Council will be giving away land to a developer. Not just any old land, but money-making car park land. And not just any old car park, but valuable car parking land near the sea front. And not just any developer, but one that's been on telly.

​Let's not forget, the Council is simply holding things on our behalf. So when the press reports that:

"A formal planning application is due to be submitted shortly and a land swap deal is close to being agreed, where Canterbury City Council would gift part of their land, used as a car park, for the scheme."

the phrase "their land" should be taken with a pinch of salt.

​Free Money

I'm intrigued by the "land swap deal" and what the other half of it might be. What, if anything, is being gained for this land? Our Council appears to be about to give away some or all of the two car parks either side of the Beach Street cul-de-sac. Between them, they have the capacity for some 65 cars - about two-thirds of the capacity of Morrison's roof-top car park.

What would the value of this land be on the open market? What would the Council be taking in parking revenue, week after week, for years? These two numbers are an indication of the value of the "gift" that our Council wants to make.

The press report indicates that the "land swap deal" is nearly a done deal. Presumably this has taken a while to organise and negotiate, so we're looking at the end of a process that's been a while in the making.​ I don't think CCC will be putting any obstacles in Mr Murray's way at this late stage, and as you can see from the pictures below - from the Herne Bay Showcase on 6th March - Mr Murray gets on famously with our smiling star-struck councillors (Jean Law, Peter Lee, Peter Vickery-Jones).

I don't know much about the planning process, but I have a feeling that this application will have a smooth ride.​

Once there was a plan. A bad plan.

The driving force behind our Council's exceptional generosity (are Coplan and Denne getting the William Street car park for free?) is the conspicuous failure of the CDA, or Central Development Area plan. Back in 2009, CCC decided that the Area Action Plan gave them a free hand to dispose of the William Street car park to the highest bidder. This would of course mean a windfall for the Council.

The developers (Coplan and Denne in this case) would then be able to use the large town centre site to generate a windfall for themselves. Obviously, they would be looking for maximum benefits for themselves, rather than delivering maximum benefits for the town. As a result, they developed what appeared at the time to be a safe (i.e. stunningly unimaginative) clone town proposal for a development, centred on a new supermarket that would be built literally next door to the existing supermarket.

​Pinning their hopes on a new supermarket was the fatal flaw in an already pretty rubbishy plan - as explained here. Which supermarket would want to invest millions to set up shop next door to a competitor? Clearly not Tesco or Sainsbury, which is why they're pursuing options on the edge of town. Would Morrison's be coaxed out of their current store into the new one? Clearly not. They've withdrawn from negotiations, having calculated that it would take decades to recover the millions the move would cost them, quite apart from the problems of selling their old (current) store.

The lynchpin, the cornerstone, the catalyst for the whole CDA project has failed to materialise, and as a result we have nothing to show after three years apart from planning blight on all the properties bordering the William Street car park, the Bus Depot, and the Beach Street area - the three blocks ear-marked for development.

​Murray's mint

And this is where Mr Murray comes in. His interest in developing the Beach Street area must have been very welcome news. Our Council will present this as contributing to the town's regeneration; Mr Murray's architect says it will revitalise the ​bottom end of Mortimer Street and Central Parade. Quite an achievement for three dozen dwellings and a handful of shops.

One shop would be demolished - 73 Central Parade, the left-hand side of Tivoli Amusements. The new development would include 4 shops, 8 three-bedroom town houses, 2 three-bedroom apartments, 16 two-bedroom apartments, 9 one-bedroom apartments, 27 private parking spaces and 11 additional parking spaces. Clearly Mr Murray stands to make a pretty penny if all this turns out well.

I'm not sure that our Council realise that there's a difference between making it easier for people to make money out of Herne Bay, and regenerating Herne Bay.

Beach Street development

Finally, here's a document that's celebrating its third birthday.​ First issued in March 2010, it's Canterbury City Council's vision for the future of Beach Street. None of this has happened yet, of course.

Beach Street Development Principles by HerneBayMatters

Herne Bay sea front development

A TV bad guy is shrugging off his image to develop a positive project to regenerate Herne Bay. Actor Bill Murray, who played Johnny Allen in EastEnders, is poised to submit plans to provide a link from the town centre to the seafront, opening up views of the historic clocktower.

The star owns properties along Central Parade and plans to demolish one, number 73 – a boarded up arcade – and build shops, flats and townhouses behind it. He told the Times:

"The development is to expose the clocktower and create something to really improve that whole area. It means demolishing the property in front of it and losing some of the public car park but the result will be a new shopping area that people can enjoy."

Mr Murray's company, Beach Street Associates, is working with Clague architects on the scheme, for Beach Street, and the proposals have been discussed with Canterbury City Council officials.

A formal planning application is due to be submitted shortly and a land swap deal is close to being agreed, where Canterbury City Council would gift part of their land, used as a car park, for the scheme. Funding would come from Mr Murray and his company. Architect Geoff Mitchell said:

"It would open a pedestrian link between Beach Street and the clocktower, which is a really strategic movement for the town. The glimpse of the clocktower will draw people along through and hopefully create a space people can enjoy. It will revitalise the bottom end of Mortimer Street and Central Parade."

Under the proposals, Beach Alley would not be affected but buildings bordering it would be redeveloped. Mr Mitchell added:

"It could be an arts quarter for Herne Bay, with a real cafe culture feel, and we have already spoken to the Arts Council about their involvement. The idea is that people will be happy to sit there and meet there, with very few cars and lots of space for pedestrians to enjoy."

He said the team was hopeful the development would give plans for the rest of the town centre a boost. These plans stalled after Morrisons pulled out of building a new store, and no other investors were found. Mr Mitchell said:

"This will create the momentum for regeneration of the rest of the town. It will give people confidence. It just has to start and people will see we are investing in Herne Bay and they will follow."

thisiskent 16th Mar 2013

Happy Easter, Mr Lawrence

​It's been a long time coming, but local hero Andy Lawrence has triumphed.

Regular readers will remember that Mr Lawrence risked life and limb to highlight the need for a barrier across Mortimer Street to make it safe for shoppers.​ That was back in September 2012.

Six months later, it looks like our beloved Council has finally got its act together, and we'll be getting the barrier.​ In a sensible world, of course, it would be open in the early morning - for deliveries to the shops - and shut the rest of the time.

We'll have to wait and see how sensible our little bit of the world (well, our Council) is in practice.​

Oh dear. He just doesn't get it, does he?

• Step 1 - put your fingers in your ears, to block out the voice of reason.
• Step 2 - shut your eyes tightly, to avoid seeing the evidence.
• Step 3 - close your mind to the facts.
• Step 4 - keep shouting "The Westgate trial is a success", in the hope you'll be believed.​
• Congratulations - you're councillor material.
  

---

Canterbury's Westgate Towers traffic ban 'should continue'

A scheme to ban traffic passing through Canterbury's Westgate Towers should be kept in place while evaluations are carried out, the city's council says.

Peter Vickery-Jones, responsible for transport on Canterbury City Council, said traffic pollution had been reduced during the year-long trial.

The ban on vehicles passing under the gateway came into effect in March 2012. About 4,000 people signed a petition calling for the scheme to be scrapped. Opponents said the changes to traffic flows caused congestion and were a danger to pedestrians.

Mr Vickery-Jones said:

"We have displaced traffic, there's no question of that. We have reduced the amount of traffic in the St Dunstan's area by 15%. That's had the effect of reducing the air quality management systems in St Peter's Place, Pound Lane, North Lane and Lower St Dunstan's [Street] to an acceptable level."

He said the scheme had evened out pollution levels across the city.

"For us to revisit the pollution back on those people who live in those areas would be a bad mistake until we've had an opportunity to look at the figures."

In a statement, Kent County Council said:

"Finding a solution to Canterbury's traffic problems is a significant challenge. The Westgate Towers scheme will be removed at the end of the trial period next month, and there will then be a thorough review."

BBC 25th Feb 2013

A bug inside the hive mind

At last, a peek behind the closed doors (and minds) at Military Road. Here's a neat little video explaining how the decisions about Kingsmead playing fields were made.

For all I know, this could be a transcript from a bugging device - it all seems very plausible and "in character".

Uploaded by canterbury openspace on 2013-02-24.

Gilbey crushes colleague, damages democracy

Be pure. Be vigilant. Behave.

This is shocking, whichever way you look at it. Cllr Gilbey fires one of his own, supposedly for speaking out of turn (see news item below).

As Cllr Hirst points out, he is a councillor for both Canterbury City and Kent County, and he decides which hat to wear on the basis of whether the issue is a District level or County level matter. Highways is a County matter, and KCC have set their face against the Westgate trial, so Hirst voted accordingly.

There is also the small point, often overlooked by the current administration at Canterbury, that the overwhelming majority of residents (i.e. voters) are against the trial for the simple reason that it's been a cock-up from the very beginning. Just as many predicted.

​So, Hirst votes in line with his (split) duty, in line with public sentiment, but against Gilbey's will. And gets fired.

This is in stark contrast to the very recent treatment of Cllr Neil Baker, who, in an act of breath-takingly reckless stupidity, drunkenly drove his car half way up a tree. He has been briefly suspended from the Executive (pay cut), will probably return to it in May, and in the meantime put onto another high profile committee. Gilbey showed his customary political sure-footedness by appointing Baker to the Joint Transport Board, which covers highways, road traffic and public transport.

What could possibly explain the very different treatment meted out to the two conservative councillors by their leader? Here's a suggestion...​ after Baker's arrest, Gilbey said:

“Neil has shown great support and done so much so it would be a shame to jump in too quickly and make a rash decision. Neil is someone I regard as a very valuable member of our group. We will do what is necessary, but it will be compassionate and take into account what Neil wants.”​

​Clearly, Baker is one of the favoured and trusted inner circle - "one of us" as they used to say in the Thatcher years.

​On the other hand, Hirst has apparently made it known (unwisely, in my opinion) that he intended to stand against Gilbey in the CCC conservative's leadership election in early May this year. Of course, he can only stand for leadership of the party if he's a member of it, and Gilbey has just stripped him of his membership by removing the whip.

Ahhh... maybe that's it. Maybe not.​

Take your pick. Hirst was fired for correctly observing the distinction between his two councillor roles, and coincidentally reflecting the public's wishes. Or he was fired to take him out of the leadership race.

Is it democracy? No, it's just the way the Canterbury City Council Conservatives do things.​ And it stinks.

---

Conservative ousted after Westgate Towers row

Infighting at Canterbury city council over the divisive Westgate Towers traffic trial has led to one Conservative being ousted from the Tory group.

Cllr David Hirst, who has also been a Kent county councillor for the past 12 years, has been stripped of his whip by city council leader John Gilbey and left as an independent member for Canterbury.

The squabble between them came to a head when Cllr Hirst supported Kent County Council (KCC) in scrapping the ban on cars through the Westgate Towers. Cllr Hirst was told via email on February 13 of the decision to remove him from the local party. In a statement, Cllr Hirst said:

"I will continue to be a Conservative and during this period continue to support and act as a Conservative within the council. I was elected as a Conservative. I will remain a full member of Kent County Council Conservative group and continue to work normally. Being a member of both councils, my obligation on each issue is clearly defined by, in whom the power is vested. At Canterbury City Council the leader has withdrawn the whip – the reason given being that I have clearly supported Kent County Council policies on some relevant issues."

Transport bosses at county hall announced last month that when the one-year-trial ends in March, the road system will revert to the original and traffic will once again pass through the historic gateway to the city.

The scheme has been almost universally derided as causing delays and increasing car fumes. The KCC decision sparked outrage among the city council, which had fought to keep the trial. Cllr Gilbey’s fury was compounded by the fact some of his own councillors had voted against the scheme. Cllr Hirst said:

"The decision to stop the trial was made by the leader of Kent County Council. Highways is a KCC responsibility. As a back bench member I felt that this was correct for Canterbury residents, traders and importantly professional offices. I supported the trial in the first instance but became alarmed by many facets of it in operation and support Mr Carter’s decision to revert to the original layout."

Cllr Hirst is also hinting that he may make his own leadership challenge in the future, adding:

"Some time ago I indicated to members of the Canterbury City Conservative group and the Conservative Association that I would stand, in the May elections of a City Council leader, as a candidate."

The Greenhill and Eddington ward member will also be a Conservative candidate in the next Kent County Council elections.

kentonline 18th Feb 2013

The Pier Trust does some explaining

A response to Shaney’s letter from Pier Trust Chairman, Doreen Stone (11th Jan 2013)

Shaney and I met up yesterday to discuss her open letter about CCC’s possible leasing of the pier platform and I think she does have a cause for grievance that a concession of this magnitude was not advertised for tenders. We agreed with her that although anyone has a right to put in for planning permission on a site whether they own it or not, the opportunity to lease the platform should have been opened to everyone.

As Chairman of the Pier Trust, I assured her that at no point had the Pier Trust been involved or consulted about Mr Cain putting in for planning permission to build a mini golf course there. None of the trustees knew anything about it until we were told in late November, nine days before the AGM by Dawn Hudd who made it clear to me that CCC were under no obligation to consult the Trust as the Memorandum of Understanding had lapsed on June 30th 2012. At this meeting, we were given a single page artist’s concept sketch (which was not in the public domain at that time) to discuss with the Board.

The trustees’ first reaction was disappointment that it would prevent us implementing our own plans for a café, a community stage and an income from concessions on the platform including roller skating, markets and a weddings’ venue. However, as I am sure David Shepherd, our then Events Manager would confirm for me, during the summer the Trust met with so many problems including Health and Safety, stewarding, submission forms specific to each event to be submitted three months before the date of the event – that we were never able to run the farmers’ and other markets, the art weekend, the performance and music events we had hoped to organise once the pier was ready for us in June.

Also, in our 2011 -2012 business plan, we had included concessions within our income calculations. However, although we returned detailed comments and our approval for at least 6 concessions, we were never given any feedback on CCC’s final choice of only 2 concessions and we certainly didn’t receive any income from them.

So, in the light of our awareness of how little we had been able to deliver on the platform in 2012, a majority of the Board began to see the reciprocal value of a well-run attraction on the platform to increase the footfall to our retail beach hut village we are still intending to build along the leg. Three trustees requested and met – all 6 were invited to attend - David Cain mid-December (after the AGM) to find out more about his proposal and whether he would involve the Trust if CCC decide to go ahead with his proposal. We were not aware that the leasing had not been advertised so that others like Shaney could also apply.

This was our position and how we came to it when I sent out the members’ Christmas Newsletter.

Council keen on permanent Westgate scheme

It was confirmed by Kent County Council today (16th January) that the St Dunstan's and Westgate Towers environmental improvements and traffic management trial will continue for the full year and finish at the end of March. KCC also announced that the road layout will return to its previous configuration at the end of the trial.

The city council will – as it always planned to – assess all the information that has been collected during the 12 months, to take a view on the effectiveness of the scheme. Both councils will then work together, as agreed by the council leaders, to design and implement a permanent scheme later in the year.

Leader of Canterbury City Council, Cllr John Gilbey, said:

"It is fair to say the trial has divided the city and people on both sides of the argument raise many valid points in making their case. But I want to stress that it is our belief that the trial has been the right thing to do and that it should have been given more time for assessment. So we would have liked to have seen the layout remain as it is after March while all the data from the trial is analysed.

This would have been more cost effective and caused the least confusion for motorists, so in these respects today's news is disappointing. But at least with the trial continuing for the full year, we will have a complete set of data to analyse. We will then spend time assessing the results, including traffic flows, air quality monitoring and all the views we received during the public consultation.

We all know that Canterbury's traffic problems are complicated but we are committed to working with the county council to tackle these, lower pollution, ease traffic flows and find a permanent solution at the Westgate Towers and in St Dunstan's."

CCC 16 January 2013

Serco wins grounds maintenance contract

The contract to look after the district’s parks and gardens from April 2013 has been retained by the current contractor, Serco.

Serco won the contract following a competitive tender process in which four companies submitted a bid. It covers council services such as parks, gardens, children’s play areas, sports pitches, benches and trees. Under the contract, Serco will also take over responsibility for the council’s dog warden service.

The contract will run until December 2017 with an option to extend it for a further five years. Executive member for the environment, Cllr Rosemary Doyle, said:

“This is an important contract because we want our open spaces to look the best they possibly can. After very careful consideration of the bids, the council decided Serco offered the best value for money and we look forward to continuing to work with them in the years ahead.”

CCC 11 January 2013

---

I didn't know the Council had a dog warden service...

Planning Cockup

CCC's slapdash use of their own website has limited our opportunity to comment on a couple of major local issues.

When it comes to advertising any planning applications in the district, our Council is only obliged to put public notices near the site in question, and in a local paper. They use Kent on Sunday, so that must be OK, because everyone in Herne Bay reads Kent on Sunday. Right?

The Council does have a section on its website dedicated to publishing Public Notices such as planning applications. However, they didn't publish any of December's planning applications on their website (in the Public Notices section) until 20th December.

So, what did we miss out on during this period of cyber-silence? The Altira Sainsbury application, and the mini golf on the Pier application. The closing date for comments on the mini golf on the Pier application is Monday 14th January, so if you've got something to say, say it soon.

Parking Consultation - another brilliant response

Mr Hudson spells out what the Department of Transport says "controlled parking" is for, and compares it with CCC's approach.

---

7th December 2012

Ref:- Canterbury City Council (Off-Street Parking Places) 0rder 20l3

Dear Mr. Carmichael,

I wish to OBJECT to the above Order concerning proposed raising of car parking charges. I believe that Canterbury City Council (CCC) made a profit of around £2.5 million in the last financial year from an overall turnover of approximately £7 million in car parking charges.

I would like to quote you a few passages from the Department of Transport Operational Guidance manual on parking and have enclosed a copy of the front page for identification.

From page 14:

"But raising revenue should not be an objective of CPE (Controlled Parking Enforcement) nor should authorities set targets for revenue or the number of Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) they issue."

Also:

"The judgement in R v LB Camden (ex parte Cran) made clear that the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 is not a revenue raising Act".

Also:

"The objective of CPE should be for 100 per cent compliance, with no penalty charges"

As you are aware CCC issued 25,275 PCNs in 2009/10 and this obviously accounts for considerable income.

From page 24, when talking about parking objectives it states:

"keep traffic moving, rather than raising revenue".

Page 112, once again it repeats:

"Authorities should never use parking charges just to raise revenue or as a local tax"

and goes on to state what should happen with any surplus income:

"In such cases local authorities must ensure that any on-street revenue not used for enforcement is used for legitimate purposes only and its main use is to improve, by whatever means, transport provision in the area so that road users benefit".

Page 135, it repeats again when talking about surpluses

"They can use any surplus to improve off-street, or, where this is unnecessary or undesirable, for certain other transport-related purpose and environmental schemes".

To sum up, Canterbury City Council is already making a hefty profit from its parking regime and any further increases seem to more of about general revenue raising, which this manual seems to clearly indicate is not the stated aim of parking regulations.

What benefits have drivers gained from previous years' profits?

I would like a written response to my objection letter concerning the issues raised.

Thanking you for your time.

Yours sincerely,

Mr. Terry Hudson

Parking Consultation - brilliant response

Mr French thinks Council employees should pay for their parking, just like the rest of us. Marvellous idea!

---

Sent: Thu Dec 13 15:37:29 2012

Subject: Parking Charges Consultation

You say that parking costs in Herne Bay have not been increased since 2010 (which is incorrect) & thrown in the cost of enforcement - a look at the balance sheet will show a profit not a loss arising from parking.

I think however that the greatest injustice here is the fact that all of this is justified by officials who park their cars for free at Military Road - a site that is on the Park Ride route & a few minutes’ walk from the centre of Canterbury. In days of "going green" how can this be justified?

Why don't your officials pay for on-street parking permits or pay for the use of the  Military Road Car Park? You can all have your change ready every morning for the ticket machine and have your nice uniformed ladies & gentlemen ticket offending vehicles.

Perhaps we should begin a campaign to make the officials pay like everyone else. I suggest that you firstly change the rules for your own parking and you pay the going rate before putting up parking charges any higher.

Some of you may be essential car vehicle users but then plenty of other people are as well.

I would appreciate your response justifying why you think you shouldn't have to pay but everyone else should - oh and pay more - yet again!

Chris French

Independent Financial Adviser, 139 High Street, Herne Bay, Kent, CT6 5NG